On 4/14/2013 7:29 AM, Tim wrote:
> Allegedly, on or about 13 April 2013, Joe Zeff sent:
>> My guess is that your reference counts servers, because mine gets most
>> of its numbers from webserver hit logs.
> 
> Unless you can see access statistics from some very general purpose
> website (i.e. one that everyone might use, like Google), as opposed to
> the stats from specialist websites (web designers, Linux users), the
> results are going to be horribly skewed.
> 
> Over the years, I've watched the stats from my website, which isn't
> really aimed at computer users, but I'd still never claim it to be
> representative of the internet users on the whole.  I've seen MSIE fall
> off its perch, many years ago.  It used to be about 85-90%, fell down to
> about 65%, with the majority of the rest being Firefox, and things
> evened out once we got a third player.
> 
> So far, this month:
> Browser              Hits   Percentage
> Google Chrome        8,134  26.3
> MS Internet Explorer 6,950  22.5
> Firefox              6,822  22.1
> Safari               4,777  15.4
> Mozilla              1,198   3.8
> Android browser      1,086   3.5
> Opera                  806   2.6
> Unknown                670   2.1
> LG (PDA/Phone browser)  92   0.2
> IPhone                  84   0.2
> Others                 239   0.7
> 
> Also, Windows is down considerably more than one might expect.
> 
> So far, this month:
> OS        Hits    Percent
> Windows   19,555  63.3
> Macintosh  6,060  19.6
> Linux      3,454  11.1
> Unknown    1,403   4.5
> Java Mobile  203   0.6
> BlackBerry    76   0.2
> OS/2          30   0
> Java          23   0
> Symbian OS    17   0
> Unknown Unix  15   0
> Others        22   0
> 
> Every now and then there's some interesting things in the access logs,
> like a C64.  I'm not sure if someone's being humerous, or whether it the
> actual device.  I know it can do it, just whether anybody would actually
> bother...
> 
> In both sets of stats, it's supposed to have weeded out robots and only
> acknowledged real users.  Though who knows how successful it is at
> weeding out the faked headers.
> 
> I think that it's safe to say, that for a long time Windows will be
> dominant, because it's foisted upon people.  It's the true computer
> user, or the seriously disgruntled user, who's going to try Linux.  And
> out of the disgruntled users, there will be those who'd rather pay for
> Mac, or can't figure out how to do anything different for themselves.
> 
> My take from this is that Linux is in about the right spot, though it's
> not doing itself much good with some the current change in design
> trends.  There's no point being a clone.  To change OSs, I want and need
> an actual alternative.  And unless you make an incredibly dumbed down
> system, there's no point in trying to pick up the absolute masses of
> clueless users.
> 


Statistics such as these?

"OS Platform Statistics and Trends"


<http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp>
-- 

  David
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to